MFA N0.20687 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA __
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD ' C
DATED THIS THE 24%: DAY OF NOVEMBER,'
BEFORE ' C' "% 1%
THE I-I0N93LE MR.JUsfr1c?gj,'3.CS,,IagyriL,V' ,_
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST VA;13'14?'EA1Q"--!\2I.<'j;€2068:/#[";;%,'(..)V()z?$ (1vm~ V
BETWEEN:
Bhimappa Irappa Gi'd.d'a.na'kar, . ~ .__ V. " « _
Age: 33 years, Occ: Nil, '
R/0 Benchanmaradi,_... _ H
Tq: Gokak, , _ _, '
Dist: Be1ga_u3m_,:1i,'S»S", _ ___APPELLANT
(By Sri__.HSS11f;§¢=;,h,,'S.VHat{ii{atSgi, Advocate)
A N D} S, S V
1. S};-ri,Asa"dah1';1ad I-quabalahaxnad
_ "0CC:i,'.CV'}_7]v.'h'1"'~I"_€I' of auto rickshaw
R/oymomin Galii Gokak,
Belgaum.
7 V '('DI'iV€I','Q'f*:ALltO Rickshaw, KA~23/3639)
7 2. Ami '1§/Iéxrthand Kulkarni,
AA ,_.Agel:" Major,
, Occ: Owner of auto rickshaw
R/0: Maliapur P.G.,
Tq: Gokak, Dist: Beigaum.
{Owner of Auto Rickshaw, KA--23/3639)
MFA No.20687 of 2008
3. The New India Assurance
Company Ltd.,
By its Senior Divisional Manager,
Club Road, Beigaum.
(By Sri. M.K.Soudhagar, Advocate for ' i
This miscellaneous.»'first appeal gfiled "under,
Section 173(1) of the Moto_r'*~.,Vehicles -.ACtV"against the
judgment and award dated iO2.09.2008._ip'a§sed in MVC
N0.935/2005 on the "file of Addit,ional 'C'ivilVJudge (Sr.
Dn.) and MACT, Gokak, partly allowing the claim petition
for compensation and '=sieekingff».'enhancement of
compensation», "
This first, appeal coming on for
admissiof1_th;is_,.day--, t.hei','(3o'uEr't delivered the following:
qfhisul appeal the injured--claimant seeking
enlh ancement of compensation.
A '.l,'?hee:'Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gokak, has
awarcvleidvcornpensation in a sum of Rs.39,000/«~ along
interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition
. V Htill the date of realisation, in MVC No.935/ 2005 disposed
MFA NCL20587 of 2008
and marked. The 3rd respondent--insurance company
though resisted the claim, did not lead any
5. The Tribunal having held
occurred due to the actionable 7
the driver of the auto–ric1<:sh_aw,
the claimant was earning and was
aged about 32 yearsl'-at' accident. As the
doctor examined d¢P'osE§1 suffered
fracture other two injuries, the
Tribunal under different
headsV,as– u11de'rf' -~ it l l'
5 * »1_} For loss of during
the pe'rio.C.1.._Oftreatrnent Rs. 3,000 / —
and agony due to
Fvrac_t"u,re Rs.].5,000/–
V A 3)if'"ti1f:€)ther simple injuries Rs. 6,000/-
l x 4)' Medical Expenses Rs.10,000/–
E5'). Nourishment charges and
other miscellaneous expenses Rs. 5,000/ —
Total Rs.39,000/–
MFA N0.2.0687 of 2.008
In all, the claimant was held entitled for as total
compensation of Rs.39,000 / -.
6. Though the doctor opined, in his
the fracture though united
moment of the foot and had corneiithe ,
squatting and walking for Tribunal
did not assess any the head ‘loss of
future earning if Bf the doctor
discloses :_ ~. iisuffered permanent
disabyility . if d
‘?’.__On the the evidence of the doctor,
leafaied ciou.1i1″sel’i’ for appellant contends that the
fought have awarded compensation under
of future earnings’ resulting from 30%
disabiliityv suffered. Counsel appearing for the
if * respoltidents brings to my notice, the fact that the doctor
Vghas himself opined that the 30% disability suffered is
“compared to the Whole body.
MFA N0..20687 of 2008
8. Having heard the learned counsel for
and on the basis of the materials H
particularly, the evidence of the doctor,
cross–examination itself the
conflicting versions. At one
disability is 30% compared but at
another stage, 30%i to be to the
particular limbtwltle the fracture
is united. by accepting the
versiori_of_ person who has treated
the tolbe held that the disability
of 30% sufferedllli.siir_1’lrespect of the limb. If that is so,
the’:’p.ercenxtageu “of…d.i.sabi1ity so far as the whole body is
iconcernyed be safely taken at 10% and the amount
tlowlardspiof future earnings’ if calculated on that
lgbasis ‘keeping in mind the multiplier applicable viz., 16
earnings of the injured found to be Rs.3,000/–
MFA N020687 of 2008
per month, will work out to Rs.57,600/~. The claimant
is entitled for the same.
9. The Claims Tribunal has
compensation towards ‘loss oi?’ 8.111!-Zc’lI1:i1:li’€»S.’
claimant is an young man’ aged 32 lyears*.””1’fhevrefore;
sum of Rs.10,000/- deserves be tinder this
head. In all other scoiirf1’p’en:lsation awarded by
the Claims Tri_bunal j’u-sit’ aI;¢sre;;soaa_b:e_
10. lln is allowed in part.
thelllclaimant is enhanced and
fixed ‘Rs.1,Q6i3;V6!jO~/:}’;”.The claimant is entitled for
intc:rest on enhanced amount at 6% per annum
it of petition till its realisation.
to bear their own costs.
\
sal-
11396?-
i lTKms*